The sound of saving salmon

I read the published reviews of both trial culls and they concluded there was no clear evidence shooting the seals produced a significant result. Other seals simply moved into the position of the seals killed near the hatchery. They tired other approaches and the one that worked the best was turning the road lights off on the Condensory Road bridge but the city was unwilling to continue that practice due to safety reasons
You should have talked to the manager of the hatchery who was there at the time to get the whole story.
 
You should have talked to the manager of the hatchery who was there at the time to get the whole story.

Yes I have been told that before! Perhaps by you ;) The initial conclusions were based on in river observations of seals including by hatchery staff. Trouble is in the following cycle the improvement in returns on Punt was little or no better than other streams in the area. Best I know there ais no published scientific data that suggest those 2 culls accomplished anything beyond killing some numbers of seals.
 
Yes I have been told that before! Perhaps by you ;) The initial conclusions were based on in river observations of seals including by hatchery staff. Trouble is in the following cycle the improvement in returns on Punt was little or no better than other streams in the area. Best I know there ais no published scientific data that suggest those 2 culls accomplished anything beyond killing some numbers of seals.
There was no follow up as DFO did not want one. This came from upper management.
 
There is a rather clear message there...

Nog
Actually, as I understand it, this is a rather typical result from culls. I read a few papers related to the results that culls produced. Most found unexpected and unintended results. That either predators of the same species or of other species quickly fill the void left by culled animals tells me something else. Culls are expensive. You have to shoot a huge number of animals for even a chance of a positive result.

The independent estimate put together for a Sable Island cull on the East Coast was massively expensive. The results are unpredictable and likely to produce an undesirable result. A cull is akin to a leap in dark into unfamiliar water. It's something that's attractive to risk seekers who are just a minority of the population and heavily comes from a particular demographic.

The problem we have with seals and sea lions is to a good extent out own making... and I am not talking about the various laws that protect them. No one stopped to think that hatcheries would produce huge concentrations of salmon at certain times of the years that was bound to attract predators. No one stopped to think that dumping millions upon millions of young salmon into a place like the Salish Sea could over load the ecosystem for those fish.

You add that to the undeniable fact that many of these areas like the Puntledge & Comox Harbour have been artificially altered in ways that actually promote predation. Much the same with the Fraser estuary.

Add to that warming ocean and river temperatures, an undeniable trend and definitely bad for salmon, it's easy to figure out what the problem is, it's us.

And that is the clear message.
 
Keep on keeping on Ralph. There are a myriad of experienced professionals that do not see it as you do.
BTW, this HARVEST has already been initiated in several areas, and continues to expand.

Cheers,
Nog
 
Actually, as I understand it, this is a rather typical result from culls. I read a few papers related to the results that culls produced. Most found unexpected and unintended results. That either predators of the same species or of other species quickly fill the void left by culled animals tells me something else. Culls are expensive. You have to shoot a huge number of animals for even a chance of a positive result.

The independent estimate put together for a Sable Island cull on the East Coast was massively expensive. The results are unpredictable and likely to produce an undesirable result. A cull is akin to a leap in dark into unfamiliar water. It's something that's attractive to risk seekers who are just a minority of the population and heavily comes from a particular demographic.

The problem we have with seals and sea lions is to a good extent out own making... and I am not talking about the various laws that protect them. No one stopped to think that hatcheries would produce huge concentrations of salmon at certain times of the years that was bound to attract predators. No one stopped to think that dumping millions upon millions of young salmon into a place like the Salish Sea could over load the ecosystem for those fish.

You add that to the undeniable fact that many of these areas like the Puntledge & Comox Harbour have been artificially altered in ways that actually promote predation. Much the same with the Fraser estuary.

Add to that warming ocean and river temperatures, an undeniable trend and definitely bad for salmon, it's easy to figure out what the problem is, it's us.

And that is the clear message.
Amazing that a simple concept can be so complicated for some people. Less seals killing salmon = more live salmon. Keep killing seals until salmon numbers show improvement. Or we can just keep spewing fog and ********!
 
Actually, as I understand it, this is a rather typical result from culls. I read a few papers related to the results that culls produced. Most found unexpected and unintended results. That either predators of the same species or of other species quickly fill the void left by culled animals tells me something else. Culls are expensive. You have to shoot a huge number of animals for even a chance of a positive result.

The independent estimate put together for a Sable Island cull on the East Coast was massively expensive. The results are unpredictable and likely to produce an undesirable result. A cull is akin to a leap in dark into unfamiliar water. It's something that's attractive to risk seekers who are just a minority of the population and heavily comes from a particular demographic.

The problem we have with seals and sea lions is to a good extent out own making... and I am not talking about the various laws that protect them. No one stopped to think that hatcheries would produce huge concentrations of salmon at certain times of the years that was bound to attract predators. No one stopped to think that dumping millions upon millions of young salmon into a place like the Salish Sea could over load the ecosystem for those fish.

You add that to the undeniable fact that many of these areas like the Puntledge & Comox Harbour have been artificially altered in ways that actually promote predation. Much the same with the Fraser estuary.

Add to that warming ocean and river temperatures, an undeniable trend and definitely bad for salmon, it's easy to figure out what the problem is, it's us.

And that is the clear message.

Where I am we cull wolves and coyotes. It works like a hot dam. If you have a wolf problem around the farm, you kill enough and problem solved.

Culls happen all over the place. They work
 

A Canadian Province Killed 463 Wolves for No Good Reason​



BTW if a proposal to kill 400 to 500 seals a year gets approved - I don't have much problem with that particulary if there is a market for the furs or FNs conusme the meat (which is likley not suitable for human consumption). The proposals to kill thousands or even 10s of thousands of seals and all the sea lions of certain species are no way comparable.

BTW seals and sea lions are not the only predators who eat (not just kill) salmon. If a reasonable seal cull doesn't work - what are you gonna kill next? Killing something seems to be the only solution that a certain segment of the fishing community has.
 

A Canadian Province Killed 463 Wolves for No Good Reason​


You do realize quoting anything the sensationalist Raincoast Foundation puts out as somehow being based upon real science in no way supports your position?

Right??

And you do realize that multiple actual accredited researchers have determined the exact opposite of the findings you quote from them, which of course is the reason the wolf culls continue today?

Right?

From what you posted regarding the seal & sea lion harvest, I would strongly suggest you are ill informed at best of what has been proposed, and what is actually occurring in this regard. Might want to study up on that a little before opining much further Ralph Ol' Chap...

Nog
 
From what you posted regarding the seal & sea lion harvest, I would strongly suggest you are ill informed at best of what has been proposed, and what is actually occurring in this regard. Might want to study up on that a little before opining much further Ralph Ol' Chap...

Nog
Where are we to study this .. Sewid's site? How about you telling us what has been proposed and what is actually happening. Has this cull been approved by who ever has to approve it? How many and where? Is the meat considered safe for human consumption?

All we are hearing is rumors, and you telling us this project is much further advanced.
 
Sewid has literally nothing to do with what is happening.
As you may recall, he was fired with prejudice from the PBPS Board quite some time ago.
He does however continue his rants on Facebook on a daily basis.
Thankfully their blocking mechanism works rather well.

The information that formed the basis of the IFMP submitted to DFO has been presented here and elsewhere. Largely based upon the work of Dr. Carl Walters and his fine associates. Not hard to find, and something I am not prepared to regurgitate here again as a consequence.

A "cull" was never asked for, nor was it given much in the way of consideration.
A HARVEST is what was proposed.
Several FN groups have always had the right to harvest these animals.
And several of those have been thus engaged.
No need for them to beg for permission, nor for anyone to "approve" what is already their defined "right".

Samples have been collected, and are being tested for contaminant presence & levels. Stay tuned on that one...

What is awaiting approval is a larger scale harvest, perhaps not limited to FN's only.
That is what DFO is currently twisting in the wind about...

Cheers,
Nog
 
You do realize quoting anything the sensationalist Raincoast Foundation puts out as somehow being based upon real science in no way supports your position?

Right??

And you do realize that multiple actual accredited researchers have determined the exact opposite of the findings you quote from them, which of course is the reason the wolf culls continue today?

Right?

From what you posted regarding the seal & sea lion harvest, I would strongly suggest you are ill informed at best of what has been proposed, and what is actually occurring in this regard. Might want to study up on that a little before opining much further Ralph Ol' Chap...

Nog

Ok to keep it short. You are just weakly playing the reference to authority fallacy. I have seen nothing you have posted that supports the generalized assertions you have made. When you do you refer us to the "esteemed" Dr Walters. Esteemed maybe, controversial always but one 'authority' does not a consensus make. With respect, you are an advocate to the extent you seem close to a fanatic to me. I have tried to leave a bit of the door open on the seal/sea lion issue but you slam it shut. Puts your response(s) into perspective at least from my POV.

Cheers
 
Sewid has literally nothing to do with what is happening.
As you may recall, he was fired with prejudice from the PBPS Board quite some time ago.
He does however continue his rants on Facebook on a daily basis.
Thankfully their blocking mechanism works rather well.

The information that formed the basis of the IFMP submitted to DFO has been presented here and elsewhere. Largely based upon the work of Dr. Carl Walters and his fine associates. Not hard to find, and something I am not prepared to regurgitate here again as a consequence.

A "cull" was never asked for, nor was it given much in the way of consideration.
A HARVEST is what was proposed.
Several FN groups have always had the right to harvest these animals.
And several of those have been thus engaged.
No need for them to beg for permission, nor for anyone to "approve" what is already their defined "right".

Samples have been collected, and are being tested for contaminant presence & levels. Stay tuned on that one...

What is awaiting approval is a larger scale harvest, perhaps not limited to FN's only.
That is what DFO is currently twisting in the wind about...

Cheers,
Nog
Are you the spokesman for this project? Other than Walter's suggesting this "harvest" would be beneficial to salmon, where are we to study this, and, where will we learn more about contaminant levels, when the data is available?
 
Are you the spokesman for this project? Other than Walter's suggesting this "harvest" would be beneficial to salmon, where are we to study this, and, where will we learn more about contaminant levels, when the data is available?

Not a spokesman per-see, but I am on the Board and well aware of what has and is occurring.
What is it you would like to "study"?
I and others have listed a great volume of supporting studies on this very site. It is right there for any who look.
I will make a point of posting for your perusal once the contaminant information has been collated.

Cheers,
Nog
 
Where I am we cull wolves and coyotes. It works like a hot dam. If you have a wolf problem around the farm, you kill enough and problem solved.

Culls happen all over the place. They work
Where I am we cull wolves and coyotes. It works like a hot dam. If you have a wolf problem around the farm, you kill enough and problem solved.

Culls happen all over the place. They work
 
Whether effective or not, a cull is a short term fix, and not a long term solution. As is usual, we normally look at a problem and point the finger at someone or something else being the cause of the problem, when in fact we should look in the mirror at ourselves (ie people)
Our habits, our behiours, our god given rights ( and I am not refering to natives). If society and humanity does not change, we will continue to argue and point fingers,; implementing band aid solutions to appease the groups affected while our natural resources dwindle away to nothing
 
Just for the record, here is the interpretation of the numbers re: wolf culls from an actual accredited researcher, rather than a sensationalist "foundation" geared towards enticing folks to hit that Donate button via emotionally charged vitriol:

B.C. caribou herds stabilizing where wolves are culled, forest ministry says​



And btw, based upon scientific analysis of the empirical data, the BC culls continue...

Cheers,
Nog
 

Wolf culls will not save endangered caribou in Western Canada, new study finds​

Social Sharing​

B.C. government relied on flawed study to expand cull, scientists say in new report​

Here
 
Again with Chris Darimont & his pet Raincoast Foundation...
icon_rolleyes.gif
 
Back
Top